Polihexanide (PHMB) 0.08% versus currently used treatments for Acanthamoeba keratitis: indirect treatment comparisons

Background/aims: Acanthamoeba keratitis is a rare, severe corneal infection. Until the recent approval of polihexanide (PHMB) 0.08% by the European Medicines Agency, there were no licensed medical therapies and current treatments relied on off-label or compounded products. The purpose of this study is to estimate the relative efficacy of PHMB 0.08% compared with current treatments. // Methods: A patient-level indirect treatment comparison (ITC) compared data from a pivotal trial of PHMB 0.08% and a retrospective real-world study of current treatments: (1) any anti-amoebic treatment (AAT), (2) PHMB 0.02% plus a diamidine (propamidine or hexamidine) 0.1% and (3) chlorhexidine (CXL) 0.02% alone or in combination with a diamidine. The primary outcome was the clinical resolution rate (CRR) without surgery within 12 months. ITCs were implemented using propensity scoring analysis with overlap weighting and adjustment for covariates (age, sex, disease stage, treatment delay, prior use of corticosteroid or antiviral). // Results: The CRR was 84.8% for PHMB 0.08% (n=66), 43.6% for any AAT (n=227), 55.0% for PHMB 0.02% plus a diamidine (n=111) and 40.0% for CXL 0.02% with or without a diamidine (n=35). In the unweighted analysis, the absolute difference (95% CI) in favour of PHMB 0.08% was 41.2% (28.8%, 51.2%; p<0.001) compared with any AAT, 29.9% (14.5%, 42.1%; p<0.001) compared with PHMB 0.02% plus a diamidine and 44.8% (23.9%, 62.3%; p<0.001) compared with CXL 0.02% with or without a diamidine. Similar results were observed in the weighted analyses. // Conclusions: These results suggest that PHMB 0.08% when delivered with the recommended protocol is significantly more effective than currently used treatments in achieving clinical resolution without surgery. The study limitations include differences in recruitment periods, diagnostic criteria and drug delivery methodology, as well as limitations of the ITC adjustment measures which can lead to residual confounding.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
UCL Discovery (University College London)
Published
2025-07-13
Primary Topic
Legionella and Acanthamoeba research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Polihexanide (PHMB) 0.08% versus currently used treatments for Acanthamoeba keratitis: indirect treatment comparisons

Vincenzo Papa, Rita Vieira Alves, Maria Antonia De Francesco, Erik Spaepen et al.
UCL Discovery (University College London)
Legionella and Acanthamoeba research
article

Polihexanide (PHMB) 0.08% versus currently used treatments for Acanthamoeba keratitis: indirect treatment comparisons

Vincenzo Papa, Rita Vieira Alves, Maria Antonia De Francesco, Erik Spaepen, JK Dart, Carlotta Galeone, Bodicoat Danielle H, Carlos Arteaga
article en

Abstract

Background/aims: Acanthamoeba keratitis is a rare, severe corneal infection. Until the recent approval of polihexanide (PHMB) 0.08% by the European Medicines Agency, there were no licensed medical therapies and current treatments relied on off-label or compounded products. The purpose of this study is to estimate the relative efficacy of PHMB 0.08% compared with current treatments. // Methods: A patient-level indirect treatment comparison (ITC) compared data from a pivotal trial of PHMB 0.08% and a retrospective real-world study of current treatments: (1) any anti-amoebic treatment (AAT), (2) PHMB 0.02% plus a diamidine (propamidine or hexamidine) 0.1% and (3) chlorhexidine (CXL) 0.02% alone or in combination with a diamidine. The primary outcome was the clinical resolution rate (CRR) without surgery within 12 months. ITCs were implemented using propensity scoring analysis with overlap weighting and adjustment for covariates (age, sex, disease stage, treatment delay, prior use of corticosteroid or antiviral). // Results: The CRR was 84.8% for PHMB 0.08% (n=66), 43.6% for any AAT (n=227), 55.0% for PHMB 0.02% plus a diamidine (n=111) and 40.0% for CXL 0.02% with or without a diamidine (n=35). In the unweighted analysis, the absolute difference (95% CI) in favour of PHMB 0.08% was 41.2% (28.8%, 51.2%; p<0.001) compared with any AAT, 29.9% (14.5%, 42.1%; p<0.001) compared with PHMB 0.02% plus a diamidine and 44.8% (23.9%, 62.3%; p<0.001) compared with CXL 0.02% with or without a diamidine. Similar results were observed in the weighted analyses. // Conclusions: These results suggest that PHMB 0.08% when delivered with the recommended protocol is significantly more effective than currently used treatments in achieving clinical resolution without surgery. The study limitations include differences in recruitment periods, diagnostic criteria and drug delivery methodology, as well as limitations of the ITC adjustment measures which can lead to residual confounding.

UCL Discovery (University College London)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Legionella and Acanthamoeba research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.